Lewis Leathers Logo

Do you guys remove all the logos from your jeans or are you bothered by them to the point you switch to a brand that doesn’t put any logo? I guess not... In my mind the same goes for LL jackets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hate patch logo on the outside, if LL want to show their branding, they can always order a custom stamped zipper pull or snaps, golden print on leather patch looks like an afterthought.

Mich486 said:

Do you guys remove all the logos from your jeans or are you bothered by them to the point you switch to a brand that doesn’t put any logo? I guess not... In my mind the same goes for LL jackets.

Click to expand...

The waist patches on my jeans are always covered by my shirts (I never tuck shirts into jeans) and, therefore, never visible. I would not wear chinos or slacks with waist patches precisely because I tuck shirts into these pants and, therefore, the patches would be visible.

A patch in the middle of the chest is considerably more prominent and conspicuous.

breezer said:

if thats the way they make 'em, then suck it up or don't....... Personally I don't have a problem with the patch.....its pretty small and could easily be disguised anyways.

I once saw a documentary film about a deli in NYC and its eccentric owner. He had certain rules, and the customers had to observe them, otherwise you were banned. One was that he would only accommodate tables of 4 or less. If 5 turned up they would be turned away, and asking if you could split the group over 2 tables was inviting a lifetime ban. The point is that each business and its owners have a way that they do business.....and for LL its placing their logo where everyone can see it. I don't have a problem with that.....after all there is plenty of other companies making leather jackets.

Click to expand...

Carlos840 said:

Lets not act like you could never get rid of the patch... When i ordered my Dominator in 2013 you could tick Logo/ No logo on the order form. My Dominator doesn't have a logo, but i am pretty sure it is still a Lewis Leathers.
They only started forcing the logo on people when they exploded on the Japanese market around 2015.

Click to expand...

breezer said:

regarding the musical discussion here.......the clash ( and many punks ) were influenced by the teddy boys and the rockers...hence the creeepers, drainpipe jeans and leather jackets. And the Clash also looked across the puddle and no doubt loved rebellious American subcultures - as shown in movies such as the Wild One and Rebel Without A Cause..... As for Lydon, he has sullied his reputation by living long enough to wind everyone up, including his fans. Luckily his moronic outbursts are outweighed, and will be outlived by the stellar music he has produced. Sid, on the other hand, did the decent thing and died before his time....leaving too many questions unanswered.....the main one being, did he really kill Nancy? But Sid will always be the poster boy for 76 & 77 punk....just the way it is.

Click to expand...

Carlos840 said:

But then if you can copy meticulously enough for a fake jacket too look like a real LL you might as well copy the patch, it can't be that complicated to do.
It's not some sort of special proof of authenticity tag, just look at the number of fake Louis Vuitton stuff around.

Click to expand...

There's one very crucial difference - and that is that while Derek can't protect his jacket designs from being meticulously copied, he can protect his trademark. Putting the label on there gives it something that no-one else, no matter how closely they otherwise copy a Lewis jacket, can do. It immediately tells anyone who sees it that it's a 'real' Lewis (counterfeiters can be dealt with by the law). This sort of thing matters more in some markets than others; from what I understand of the Japanese scene, authenticity is king, and people will pay for it. Only a Lewis is a Lewis - and that's the sort of customer who will want or at least not quibble over a logo. (Maybe it's also subtler when it's in both a language and alphabet not your own?) I've seen it a thousand times with guitars - Japanese companies frequently build better guitars than anyone else (Whatever the collectability, Gretsch guitars built in Japan have a quality level far above the majority built in the old days in the US). Japanese IP law is also freer in terms of the designs - any Japanese company can build a guitar identical to a Fender Stratocaster, right down to a logo that even looks like Fender at first, til you read it closely - but there's a strata of the Japanese market that will always pay double for an American made Fender because authenticity. To folks like that, logos matter.

And, of course, as previously noted, Lewis logos were the norm on the jackets by the middle sixties, so anyone looking for that "1967 authenticity" (or wanting a Lightning exactly like Joe Strummer's - the punk market being as significant as the rocker market in the Far East) and who fixates on the details in the way the Japanese scene does will want it with the logo.

I think ultimately it's just a very different consumer culture, and if that's Lewis' biggest market, then it stands to reason. Granted, they could still do no-logo as a customer option, but it seems they don't need to in order to shift the units they want to...

I personally don't see how the tag does anything other than show the world you have a Lewis Leather jacket, and i don't like that.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly not entirely unsympathetic to your view on this, though I suspect that it's not a widely held one or we'd see Lewis offering the option. You have to remember that Lewis are steeped in British motorcycling culture, where there's much more tolerance of branding, and having a Lewis meant something and people wanted to show it off. I'm told by a friend who raced speedway in the 70s (and still occasionally does) that on that scene at one time it was very tribal - you were a Lewis man or you were a Rivett's of Leytonstone "Highwayman" man. Course, Lewis put a stop to that by buying out Rivett's and killing off the rival label!

Mich486 said:

Do you guys remove all the logos from your jeans or are you bothered by them to the point you switch to a brand that doesn’t put any logo? I guess not... In my mind the same goes for LL jackets.

Click to expand...

Interesting contention. Some logos in some places acceptable, others not.... I know I'm guilty of logo snobbery; I have a pair of engineer boots with 'TCX' branded on the front, towards the top of the shaft. I wish they didn't (even though it's never scene), though to be brutally honest "Triumph" would bother me far less...

navetsea said:

I hate patch logo on the outside, if LL want to show their branding, they can always order a custom stamped zipper pull or snaps, golden print on leather patch looks like an afterthought.

Click to expand...

Possibly, but then again that wouldn't be seen - back to the target customer / main market...

You know what, Lewis Leathers Built up in 1892 (in those days as D. Lewis Ltd), Lewis Leathers is the most established British bike dress organization. They provided early pilots and motorcyclists with the essential defensive attire, extraordinarily intended to withstand the icy and wet British atmosphere.

I think Edward has got a point. The cache of the name trumps quality, so having the real thing is a big deal for many in Japan, even if quality wise there are better local alternatives.
Well off Japanese drive Mercedes, not Lexus, for example.
An ex-girlfriend of mine went to work for Seiko after graduation, and she works in a department whose only function is how to bridge the perception of quality gap with Swiss watches. It's an intractable problem because they are up against heritage captured in years of film and media. For example, think of all the vintage movie clips in Rolex's 'It doesn't tell the time, it tells history' campaign.

Just had a thought, to revive this older post(not dead yet).

All those who do not like makers labels or branding let me ask you this.
Would any of you remove the brand mark from your car or motorcycle be it Harley Davidson, Ford, Lexus, Cadillac, Suzuki etc? And would you hunt everywhere for that vintage winged B for your 1940s Bentley or even a Fiat badge to show the world it wasn't a Lada.
Makes you think?

I missed that thread the first time, so thanks for putting it back up!
I have been looking at Lightning for quite some time, would have preferred it without the logo, like a lot of posters here, I prefer to avoid logos normally.
But the arguments for the logo make sense as well, so I might end up getting a lightning.

rocketeer said:

Just had a thought, to revive this older post(not dead yet).

All those who do not like makers labels or branding let me ask you this.
Would any of you remove the brand mark from your car or motorcycle be it Harley Davidson, Ford, Lexus, Cadillac, Suzuki etc? And would you hunt everywhere for that vintage winged B for your 1940s Bentley or even a Fiat badge to show the world it wasn't a Lada.
Makes you think?

Click to expand...

Some people do actually remove the brand, and I think that the option is available from some brands. Granted, it's rare to see a car without the branding.
It probably has to do with habit and history, cars and motorbikes have come with brands for a very long time (always?). Clothing in the fashion world started displaying obnoxious branding in the 90s if I am not mistaken, and it was due to customer demand, they wanted to show off their expensive acquisitions. And this is jarring for the likes of us.
Jeans on the other hand have come with a patch for a long time (please correct this if wrong).
Jackets are a bit more complicated, because racing ones are full of patches but personal ones have been in line with the rest of the fashion items.
So all in all it's probably just habit and where you stand regarding fashion.

red devil said:

I missed that thread the first time, so thanks for putting it back up!
So all in all it's probably just habit and where you stand regarding fashion.

Click to expand...

Yes mate, not too many posts to trawl through to get into the topic before it diversifies too much.
Your last sentance sums up my thoughts as well, but Lewis do say their jackets are authentic copies of their original pattens or words to that effect. Having a brand where there was no brand does make them historically inaccurate thats all.
It bothers some and not others even in the flight jacket world. People will wear patches for all sorts of reasons, some are personal to family and friends others because they like them(me) while others will only wear a plain jacket as it is for casual wear in a modern world.
I am sure there is someone on here who will tell you that wearing an A2 with a certain squadron patch is not correct as that USAAF group was not issued with a this or that contract and stuff like that, personally I am not bothered as long as it does not insult anyone.

rocketeer said:

All those who do not like makers labels or branding let me ask you this.
Would any of you remove the brand mark from your car or motorcycle be it Harley Davidson, Ford, Lexus, Cadillac, Suzuki etc? And would you hunt everywhere for that vintage winged B for your 1940s Bentley or even a Fiat badge to show the world it wasn't a Lada.
Makes you think?

Click to expand...

IT's certainly interesting that we accept branding on some things but not others.

(Mind you, I always quite liked the idea of a hot Fiat 124 disguised as a Lada... ).

I would be curious as to whether anyone who doesn't like the Lewis logo would wear the special edition jacket they did with Triumph a few years ago, where the Triumph logo replaced the Lewis one.

red devil said:

Some people do actually remove the brand, and I think that the option is available from some brands. Granted, it's rare to see a car without the branding.
It probably has to do with habit and history, cars and motorbikes have come with brands for a very long time (always?). Clothing in the fashion world started displaying obnoxious branding in the 90s if I am not mistaken, and it was due to customer demand, they wanted to show off their expensive acquisitions. And this is jarring for the likes of us.
Jeans on the other hand have come with a patch for a long time (please correct this if wrong).
Jackets are a bit more complicated, because racing ones are full of patches but personal ones have been in line with the rest of the fashion items.
So all in all it's probably just habit and where you stand regarding fashion.

Click to expand...

I suppose we can draw a distinction between patches or badges we choose to apply to our jackets, as opposed to a label the manufacturer chooses. A rocker's jacket would have been made uniquely his this way - as opposed to the fashion leathers I saw on Oxford Street a while back. Perfecto style, saw one in the window with "Be Yourself, Be Original" painted on the back..... then I realised it was one of a dozen all exactly the same hanging on the rail. Couldn't help but laugh - wish I'd had a camera on me at the time, but the phone battery was flat. Anythehow.... As a general rule I'm a no-logo person, but it surprises me that there's as much objection to Lewis' logo as there seems to be on 'historical' grounds, given that Leis were still in their heyday when they started doing it. (I get it more if people want a specific 50s spec look).

rocketeer said:

Yes mate, not too many posts to trawl through to get into the topic before it diversifies too much.
Your last sentance sums up my thoughts as well, but Lewis do say their jackets are authentic copies of their original pattens or words to that effect. Having a brand where there was no brand does make them historically inaccurate thats all.
It bothers some and not others even in the flight jacket world. People will wear patches for all sorts of reasons, some are personal to family and friends others because they like them(me) while others will only wear a plain jacket as it is for casual wear in a modern world.
I am sure there is someone on here who will tell you that wearing an A2 with a certain squadron patch is not correct as that USAAF group was not issued with a this or that contract and stuff like that, personally I am not bothered as long as it does not insult anyone.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. It's all about individual choice.

I would love to have my car without the logos. I never buy new cars though- so, not an option.

rocketeer said:

Just had a thought, to revive this older post(not dead yet).

All those who do not like makers labels or branding let me ask you this.
Would any of you remove the brand mark from your car or motorcycle be it Harley Davidson, Ford, Lexus, Cadillac, Suzuki etc? And would you hunt everywhere for that vintage winged B for your 1940s Bentley or even a Fiat badge to show the world it wasn't a Lada.
Makes you think?

Click to expand...

A lot of what the eye finds appealing has to do with conditioning, I suppose. Would you buy a suit that had the logo on the outside? A bold "Armani" on the outside? Or a pair of dress shoes? A high-end pair of cowboy boots? It would look weird, right? That's how I feel about the logo on most leather jackets. The logo just looks out of place. Whereas when people remove the logos from their cars, that looks weird to my eye.

I guess we’ll never convince each other of what logo is acceptable and what not but at least I hope we will all agree that Lewis Leathers logo is all but bold. In fact on a double rider it doesn’t even show when the lapels are opened.

Also I believe nobody here is wearing a Lewis leathers with a patch to make a statement about the brand or to show off (like it’s the case with designer bags etc) but rather just genuinely like the style. And the patch is part of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Big J said:

An ex-girlfriend of mine went to work for Seiko after graduation, and she works in a department whose only function is how to bridge the perception of quality gap with Swiss watches......

Click to expand...

The Japanese have very complex psychologies. While they are so proud of many of their own products, they have special interests in foreign brands. My Japanese colleagues told me that Seiko is not a common brand that they would use, posh people go for Rolexes while the 'commons' go for brands like Casio or Citizen or Alba (part of Seiko now). As hard as Seiko are pushing their superiority in quality and technologies with their premium Grand Seiko range, most people (including me) would still prefer Swiss brands.

Acererak said:

A lot of what the eye finds appealing has to do with conditioning, I suppose. Would you buy a suit that had the logo on the outside? A bold "Armani" on the outside? Or a pair of dress shoes? A high-end pair of cowboy boots? It would look weird, right? That's how I feel about the logo on most leather jackets. The logo just looks out of place. Whereas when people remove the logos from their cars, that looks weird to my eye.

Click to expand...

Both camps have very valid points, but to me, the logo thing is very contextual. We used to laugh at some people who left the logos on their suits' sleeves and the tags on their RayBans. Car badges are completely different, even though makers like Mercedes or BMWs now offer not to place model numbers on the boots (and yes, you need to pay extra for that!), they claim this is for people who want subtleties while help to protect the egos of those who bought the bottom models!?

And for your enjoyment, this video shows the fashion trend with caps not so long ago.

Mich486 said:

Also I believe nobody here is wearing a Lewis leathers with a patch to make a statement about the brand or to show off (like it’s the case with designer bags etc) but rather just genuinely like the style. And the patch is part of it.

Click to expand...

I personally have no problem with the Lewis logo (on my Lightning), it is anyway quite subtle compared to those on Barbour or Belstaff jackets anyway. And honestly, how many people these days know about Lewis Leather these days.

Rocketeer has got a point. The reason I bought my RR was (aside from being a giveaway), was that I love the hood ornament. Everything about it is just so Art Deco retro. I love the leaping cat on my Jaguar, it makes me feel connected to a bye gone era.

@Justhandguns, I get the feeling that there's a lot of insecurities driving the Japanese to compete with western manufacturing. And also a feeling (however misplaced) that the Japanese lost WWII due to a lack of engineering and scientific know-how (the atom bomb), hence the continued government support for scientific and engineering industries, and the the education of such at the tertiary level (national universities have even started closing humanities departments on government orders).
It's a national obsession that overlooks two important points;
1. We won the war because our ideology was better; we accepted European scientist immigrants who were instrumental to the Manhatten Project instead of putting them in concentration camps.
2. The manufacturing based post-War Japanese 'miracle' was entirely due to US investment, technology transfer, and provision of access to US markets (it's not a coincidence that Japan's 'lost decades' started when the Cold War ended).

“to protect the egos of those who bought the bottom models!? “

Muah! Yeah, you never see an s-class with the model number removed.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

rocketeer said:

Just had a thought, to revive this older post(not dead yet).

All those who do not like makers labels or branding let me ask you this.
Would any of you remove the brand mark from your car or motorcycle be it Harley Davidson, Ford, Lexus, Cadillac, Suzuki etc? And would you hunt everywhere for that vintage winged B for your 1940s Bentley or even a Fiat badge to show the world it wasn't a Lada.
Makes you think?

Click to expand...

My Yamaha bike is free from any tuning fork or brand name, but my Lada niva is proudly displaying its Viking ship on the grill...
I think i am doing it wrong!

Acererak said:

“to protect the egos of those who bought the bottom models!? “

Muah! Yeah, you never see an s-class with the model number removed.

Click to expand...

Just found this article, quite an interesting read....

Interesting discussion with many good points of view. I agree that one’s subjective perception of the acceptability of a logo depends on the context. For example, the overwhelming majority of cars have logos/badges. As such, ubiquitous car badges are an accepted and inextricable component of the car itself. In contrast, the majority of leather jackets do not bare a chest logo and, therefore, those with chest logos deviate from the norm.

There are clothing products for which logos are more common, including baseball caps and t-shirts. I used to have many t-shirts with logos. However, I ditched all of my logoed t-shirts in favor of non-logo t-shirts. I prefer the cleaner look of t-shirts without writing or pictures. Baseball caps are the one clothing item that I continue to wear with logos. I don’t have a cogent explanation for this; rather, it is simply my subjective perception of caps, based on what I am accustomed to.

While many disagree, I personally view the Lewis chest logo as very prominent and eye catching. I was at Stronghold this past weekend and, when viewing their enormous supply of LL jackets, my eye was immediately drawn to and fixated on the chest logos.

Lastly, the de-badging of cars in an interesting phenomenon. In my experience, de-badging is most common with high end sports cars and entry level models of premium brands. With high end sports cars, the owners explain that the badges detract from the clean lines and design of the car. With entry level models of premium brands, the de-badging makes it more difficult to distinguish the car from a more expensive model from the same brand with the same exterior shape. I have de-badged sports cars and love the clean look. Some people add false badges to their cars. For example, Mercedes makes a small fortune selling "AMG" badges to owners of non-AMG cars and many Mercedes with AMG badges are not in fact AMGs. The same is true with "M" badges from BMW. I personally am not in favor of false badging.

Edward said:

A rocker's jacket would have been made uniquely his this way - as opposed to the fashion leathers I saw on Oxford Street a while back. Perfecto style, saw one in the window with "Be Yourself, Be Original" painted on the back..... then I realised it was one of a dozen all exactly the same hanging on the rail. Couldn't help but laugh - wish I'd had a camera on me at the time, but the phone battery was flat.

Click to expand...

Would have loved to see that pic

Acererak said:

A lot of what the eye finds appealing has to do with conditioning, I suppose. Would you buy a suit that had the logo on the outside? A bold "Armani" on the outside? Or a pair of dress shoes? A high-end pair of cowboy boots? It would look weird, right? That's how I feel about the logo on most leather jackets. The logo just looks out of place. Whereas when people remove the logos from their cars, that looks weird to my eye.

Click to expand...

Don't give the big labels any bad ideas!!
Although there have probably been some suits made with obnoxious logos...

Superfluous said:

Lastly, the de-badging of cars in an interesting phenomenon. In my experience, de-badging is most common with high end sports cars and entry level models of premium brands. With high end sports cars, the owners explain that the badges detract from the clean lines and design of the car. With entry level models of premium brands, the de-badging makes it more difficult to distinguish the car from a more expensive model from the same brand with the same exterior shape. I have de-badged sports cars and love the clean look. Some people add false badges to their cars. For example, Mercedes makes a small fortune selling "AMG" badges to owners of non-AMG cars and many Mercedes with AMG badges are not in fact AMGs. The same is true with "M" badges from BMW. I personally am not in favor of false badging.

Click to expand...

False badges... now that is a sad thing to see.
Can't say it is surprising that the big car manufacturers are making a profit out of this practice